Search

We investigate a structural model of demographic-economic interactions for England during 1570 to 1850. We estimate that the annual rate of population growth consistent with constant real wages was 0.4% before 1760 but 1.5% thereafter. We find that exogenous shocks increased population growth dramatically in the early decades of the Industrial Revolution. Simulations of our model show that if these demographic shocks had occurred before the Industrial Revolution the impact on real wages would have been catastrophic and that these shocks were largely responsible for very slow growth of real wages during the Industrial Revolution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eeh.2007.01.002 Byline: Nicholas Crafts (a), Terence C. Mills (b), Abay Mulatu (c) Keywords: Total factor productivity; Railways Abstract: This paper revisits the issue of the productivity performance of Britain's railways with an improved dataset and modern cliometrics. We find a slowdown in TFP growth between 1850 and 1870, after which it stabilized at about 1.1%. An analysis of company-level productivity performance reveals large discrepancies in TFP growth and substantial cost inefficiency. The evidence suggests that there was managerial failure in companies with agency problems in a context of collusion and high entry barriers. A wider implication is that the neoclassical exoneration of late-Victorian British management may be less convincing for the services sector than for manufacturing. Author Affiliation: (a) Department of Economics, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK (b) Department of Economics, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK (c) School of Social Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK Article History: Received 24 January 2005 Article Note: (footnote) [star] Financial support from the Economic and Social Research Council under Grant R000239536 is gratefully acknowledged. We wish to thank Brian Mitchell for generously making available to us his data and Peter Cain for helpful advice. We have benefited from comments by Tony Arnold, Dudley Baines, Steve Broadberry, Terry Gourvish, Peter Howlett, and three anonymous referees. The usual disclaimer applies.

Measures of market potential for regions of Britain are created by relying on the spacial dispersion of Gross Domestic product and its availability. The peripherality of some of the British regions is discussed in detail.

Research indicates that liberalization of trade has had a generally positive effect on growth for developing countries, but successful capital liberalization relies on high quality of institutions. Geography as a factor in explaining income distribution disparity is also examined.

I examine the implications of technological change for productivity, real wages and factor shares during the industrial revolution using recently available data. This shows that real GDP per worker grew faster than real consumption earnings but labour's share of national income changed little as real product wages grew at a similar rate to labour productivity in the medium term. The period saw modest total factor productivity growth which limited the growth both of real wages and of labour productivity. Economists looking for an historical example of rapid labour-saving technological progress having a seriously adverse impact on labour's share must look elsewhere. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The UK industrial revolution that occurred in 1760-1830 can be effectively analyzed by growth economists using models that incorporate total-factor-productivity (TFP) growth. The endogenous-innovation model developed by Young (1993) contains characteristics that complement historical events. However, TFP-based models should not give unnecessary emphasis to research & development issues.